About the Journal
Publisher
The Rwanda Biomedical Centre (RBC), KG 644 St, Kigali, Rwanda
Sources of Support
The RMJ is supported by professionals from Rwanda and around the world volunteering as editors, peer-reviewers, Journal manager and desktop publisher to ensure its sustainability. The journal does not charge any article processing charges (APCs).
Peer Review
The RMJ’s practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published as detailed here.
All original articles, case reports, and review articles are sent for peer review. Commissioned articles are also subject to standard peer-review procedures. Peer review aims to ensure that all authors receive feedback as well as the decision regarding their submission. A minimum of two experts review submitted manuscripts. The RMJ employs a double-blind peer review process meaning that reviewers are not given any identifying features of the authors of the manuscript. Authors are provided with feedback from the peer review, and this is anonymized. Acceptance of articles for publication is dependent on the following: originality of the work, quality of the methodology, clarity of presentation of results, the accuracy of statistical analysis, insightfulness of the discussion, comprehensibility of the writing, appropriate appraisal of limitations, and thoughtful presentation of implications of the study.
Peer reviewers have five possible options:
1. Accept in current form
2. Accept after minor revision (by the journal editorial team)
3. Reject initial submission for minor revision: asking the author(s) to make minor revisions and resubmit
4. Reject initial submission for major revision: asking the author(s) to make significant revisions and resubmit
5. Reject initial submission entirely: with no opportunity for resubmission.
“Some people believe that true scientific peer review begins only on the date a paper is published.” In that spirit, the RMJ accepts letters to the editor for readers to submit comments, questions, or criticisms about published articles, and authors have a responsibility to respond appropriately and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise even after publication (as per International Committee of Medical Journal Editors - ICMJE).
The RMJ uses a double-blind peer review process for the review of manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal and expectations of peer reviewers are described by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (Click here) or the Council of science editors (Click here) and the Committee of Publication Ethics (Click here). Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details.
Reviewers, therefore, should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers must not publicly discuss authors' work and must not appropriate authors' ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews.
Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests to review and to submit reviews within the time agreed. Reviewers’ comments should be constructive, honest, and polite. When a manuscript outcome is given to the authors, the reviewers' comments are provided in an anonymous format. This is to provide feedback to the submitting author on how to improve the manuscript for future submission.
Reviewers should declare to the Chief Editor, any conflict of interest and recuse themselves from the peer-review process.
Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere (as per Committee of Publication Ethics, COPE)
Peer reviewers should:
- only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
- respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
- not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
- declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
- not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
- be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments
- acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
- provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
- recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct
In additional to these standards from COPE, the RMJ expects that peer-reviewers have the duty to:
· Not level personal criticisms of authors
· Use clear and supported arguments and reliable references (not defamatory or libellous) during the review
· Address ethical aspects:
-
- Plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation
- Duplication / redundant article
- Ethical approval, informed consent
- Declare any conflicts of interests:
- Competitive
- Collaborative
- Any relationships or connections with authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
RMJ is an Open Access journals distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-ND) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The RMJ provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making scientific research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles free of charge
Publication Scheduling
The journal is published quarterly.
General
The Rwanda Medical Journal (RMJ), is a not-for-profit scientific medical journal created in 1967. It is published entirely online in open-access electronic format. Since 2010 the RMJ has been available open-access journal; free to submit, no publication fees and free to download.
?Issues are published four times annually.
The Rwanda Medical Journal aims at offering in-depth analysis of health-related issues from a Professional and research centered perspective. In this light, the journal will address fundamental concerns and dilemmas encountered in the health sector in Rwanda, acknowledging the multi-faceted nature of problems and solutions. It should reflect agreements and differences in goals and point of view among health professionals in order to foster communication and cooperation, new thinking and action, and new form of consensus.
The RMJ is an interdisciplinary research journal for publication of original work in all the health disciplines. Through a rigorous process of evaluation and peer review, The RMJ strives to publish original works of high quality for a diverse audience of healthcare professionals. The Journal seeks to deepen knowledge and advance scientific discovery to improve the quality of care of patients in Rwanda and internationally.
A new issue is published quarterly with supplements and publication materials are submitted online on RMJ submission portal and should fulfill the RMJ’s instructions. Before submitting please ensure that you have reviewed the author instructions. All articles that do not comply with the author instructions will be returned to the author for amendment.
